halofanonfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Tuckerscreator/Anti-Aircraft Model 3 Lucasian Nonprojectile Cannon
NCF for several reasons. Firstly, it is impossible to produce a "LASER Sword"; LASER's go on infinitely in the direction they are pointed, until something blocks the path. Secondly, the image shows a SPARTAN-II holding a Machine Gun with an ammunition belt; not applicable to a weapon of the kind you are proposing. Thirdly, how exactly would a "LASER Sword" be used in an anti-aircraft capacity in the first place? Fourthly, it wouldn't be called a "Noob" anything; "Noob" is slang used by American adolescents, most often gamers... trained, mature infantrymen wouldn't use such terminology. Lastly, if it is a "LASER Sword," then it isn't a firearm or a cannon. In accordance with newer posted information: Firstly, if it /were/ blocked by anything, then the LASER would either bounce off (if it were weak enough to do so), or, given that you describe the beam as immensely powerful, it would simply melt through the obstruction. Second point on image appropriateness still stands. Thirdly, maintaining a beam long enough for use in an anti-aircraft role would be a significant waste of power, and even at that, it would only be used on sub-sonic aircraft; Human reflexes would be incapable of maneuvering a beam to destroy a Seraph travelling at speeds in excess of the speed of sound. Fourth point on nick name appropriateness still stands; from personal experience as a ground infantryman in the RoKA, I can tell you that although profanity is more than common, slang such as "noob" isn't used at all. Fifth point on improper use of "cannon" and "firearm" still stands; I'd reccommend using the Spartan LASER's naming conventions. Sixthly, it wouldn't "make anything it touches burst into flames." And lastly, given that UNSC infantrymen using Spartan LASER's do not require protective goggles, one using this weapon wouldn't either. This should probably be relegated to the prototype bin, as in a prototype Spartan Laser. The version seen in Halo is man-portable without heavy equipment and power supplies. Also, re-purposing concept art of Jorge from Halo: Reach, not helping your case --Lord Ookami 07:23, April 15, 2010 (UTC) 1. Err, no. A mirror would be even less sound, since it wouldn't do anything in the way of stopping the beam; if the LASER is as powerful as you say, it would melt through. There is no efficient way to produce a "LASER Sword," any way you justify it. 2. It's Halo: Reach concept art, which means what is in the image is canon equipment. It's equivalent to labeling Sangheili Concept Art as a member of your own fanon alien species. 3. Primary point was that it would only be efficient against subsonic aircraft. On the note of power, Fusion Packs in MJOLNIR Powered Armours are highly expensive pieces of equipment, and wouldn't be wasted on a weapon that wouldn't be any more efficient than a standard M41 Missile Launcher. 4. Acceptable. 5. Then I'd suggest replacing "cannon" with something more appropriate, such as "Beam Weapon" 6. Yes, they are. But because something is destructive doesn't mean it will automatically light anything it touches on fire. Logically, it'd either melt or burn through. Since SOMEONE won't stop posting this link in the IRC, let me put it to you straight. You're not going to get a laser sword. Ever. It goes against the laws of science. The closest you're going to get is a plasma knife, and that's used for cauterizing wounds, not for killing people. Plus, why would you even WANT a laser sword, when a metal knife (which is actually practical) will do the same effing thing? Quite frankly, and I apologize if I hurt your feelings, but the entire concept is retarded. -- Sergeant Major Avery Johnson 19:25, April 17, 2010 (UTC) You accuse me of "attacking" the article, yet keep in mind; any article, one paragraph or not, can be tagged NCF at any stage, unless it is completely unwritten. So long as what is presented is non canonical or unrealistic, its valid for tagging. Now, onto the article. Firstly, unless you used it for several minutes at a time, your battery, fusion cell or not, would run out quickly. In addition, no, it wouldn't be able to recharge; if there is no power left in the battery, your only choice is to put a new battery. Thirdly, even if you argue that it can remain active for prolonged periods of time, keep in mind that even the Sentinel Beam, a Forerunner LASER weapon, can only hold continuous fire for several seconds before overheating. Fourthly, what you're describing is highly impractical. Conventional shoulder-carried missile launchers are already highly effective, and are much cheaper to produce; a weapon that fires a continuous LASER beam, and that runs on fusion cells, would be extremely costly, and given that its not all that effective in the first place, the UNSC would most likely remove it from service. Fifthly, unless you mount an optical or electronic scope, you can't use the weapon for sniping. And mind you, ranting won't help your case; the best you can do is ignore blatantly hostile comments, and work towards improving the article with non-hostile users. Otherwise, it engenders "Flame Wars." Nomination for Namespace For #As per above conversation, and NCF policy. #Your body will burn.